Apuleius tells us of his own popularity as a writer, and yet both the literary and the material r... more Apuleius tells us of his own popularity as a writer, and yet both the literary and the material records are silent about his works for almost one hundred and fifty years after his death. Various attempts to identify allusions to his works before Lactantius and other fourth-century authors have proven unconvincing. This article suggests that there is a clear allusion to the Metamorphoses in Tertullian's treatise Aduersus Valentinianos (beginning of the third century). Tertullian uses Apuleius to denigrate the Valentinians and to assimilate the name of one of their gods to the braying of an ass.
In the prologue to the Rhetorica ad Herennium book 4, Cornificius boldly departs from tradition: ... more In the prologue to the Rhetorica ad Herennium book 4, Cornificius boldly departs from tradition: he will create his own examples to illustrate styles and figures of rhetoric, rather than drawing from poets and orators, as Greek manuals typically did. This methodological discussion, which resembles a declamation, portrays itself as an exemplum in that it embodies the precepts exposed in books 1, 2, and 3. Moreover, this exemplary discussion partakes in a larger debate between philosophy and rhetoric and must be considered in its historical and cultural context.
The first book of Cicero's epistles to his friends displays a cunning arrangement, and there is m... more The first book of Cicero's epistles to his friends displays a cunning arrangement, and there is much to gain in reading its eleven letters as a collection. I this article I argue that the conventional affirmation of the bond that joins writer and addressee grows into a story of loyalty and obligation, and that the arrangement designed by the editor enhances this story to Cicero's advantage. I also propose a new reading of letter 10 (the last in the collection) arguing that it has been often dismissed and misunderstood.
How long was a colon? How does one divide prose in cola and determine the length their syllables?... more How long was a colon? How does one divide prose in cola and determine the length their syllables? And which clausulae did Cicero favor? This abstract (from the section on style of my commentary on Cicero's De Provinciis Consularibus) is meant to address these questions and provide a step by step guide to the rules of scanning prose; mastering these rules should allow anyone to identify and appreciate Latin prose rhythm and clausulae.
In analyzing the double sermocinatio of Cicero's Pro Plancio, I argue that each plays a central r... more In analyzing the double sermocinatio of Cicero's Pro Plancio, I argue that each plays a central role in the oration and that a web of literary references links it to some letters by Cicero and to Plato's Crito. Appreciating these literary references both clarifies and strengthens the line of Cicero’s self-defense.
This article analyzes the strategies by which the narrator of Caesar’s Bellum Civile constructs h... more This article analyzes the strategies by which the narrator of Caesar’s Bellum Civile constructs his authority and promotes his version of the civil war. Despite being generally omnipresent, omniscient and un-intrusive, the narrator can abandon his covert position and all-encompassing knowledge and use multiple devices to guide the readers’ perception of salient events. Switches of focalization, inferred motivation, presentation through negation and intratextual echoes color the narrative of key episodes, such as the negotiations of peace with Pompey in Book 1 and the descriptions of the battles at Dyrrachium and Pharsalus.
Well-known as a brilliant general and politician, Julius Caesar also played a fundamental role in... more Well-known as a brilliant general and politician, Julius Caesar also played a fundamental role in the formation of the Latin literary language and remains a central figure in the history of Latin literature. With twenty-three chapters written by renowned scholars, this Companion provides an accessible introduction to Caesar as an intellectual along with a scholarly assessment of his multiple literary accomplishments and new insights into their literary value. The Commentarii and Caesar’s lost works are presented in their historical and literary context. The various chapters explore their main features, the connection between literature, state religion and politics, Caesar’s debt to previous Greek and Latin authors, and his legacy within and outside of Latin literature. The innovative volume will be of great value to all students and scholars of Latin literature and to those seeking a more rounded portrait of the achievements of Julius Caesar.
Abstract: Intertextual references help Caesar to narrate the defeat at Atuatuca. Scholars have ac... more Abstract: Intertextual references help Caesar to narrate the defeat at Atuatuca. Scholars have acknowledged the intratextual relation to another episode in the BG, but Caesar’s account is embedded in a more complex field of textual references. The locus of two generals dangerously disagreeing is found in Greek literature and historiography; and, especially, Caesar’s vocabulary connects Atuatuca to a famous episode by Polybius. These references help to situate Caesar in Greek and Roman literary tradition and demonstrate that the dynamics of imitation, competition and appropriation typical of poetry from the Augustan age were well established in prose authors of the late Republic.
Abstract: Recent scholarship consistently considered Caesar's Bellum Civile (BC) an unfinishe... more Abstract: Recent scholarship consistently considered Caesar's Bellum Civile (BC) an unfinished work or propaganda, unworthy of being called “literature.” This dissertation,“Ideology and Community in Caesar's Bellum Civile,” reassesses its literary ...
sometimes distracting (e.g. p. 158), at least for this reader. My final point relates to how M. s... more sometimes distracting (e.g. p. 158), at least for this reader. My final point relates to how M. situates his excellent monograph within the sphere of Roman historiography. At times M. demarcates strongly (polemically, even) between (on the one hand) ‘literary’ (pp. 7, 69) or ‘intertextual’ readings (p. 1) (which he robustly criticises, despite himself using the same techniques productively e.g. on pp. 40–1, 80–1) and (on the other hand) ‘historiographical’ ones (to which he himself lays claim [p. 208]). Yet the former techniques are surely subsets of the latter, given that historiography focuses on the writing of history. I suggest that when M. makes such distinctions, ‘historiographical’ and ‘historical’ might have been clearer terms to use. Although M. defines his own scholarship as delivering a new kind of historiography, aspects of his monograph still have a tangible relationship with the trailblazers of historiography (T.P. Wiseman and A.J. Woodman) despite his unease about such associations. Interestingly, M.’s cover image of the Batavian cavalryman Imerix’s fragmentary gravestone and even the monograph’s title seem to make a statement, pointedly aligning M.’s scholarship with serious history and distancing him from ‘literary’ readings of Tacitus’ Histories. Nonetheless the body of the work is packed with perceptive historiographical (as I see it) analysis of Tacitus’ Histories (and well beyond). M.’s achievement is to deliver historiographical readings which are rooted (more firmly than some) in historical soil: indeed his even-handed and detailed references in footnotes to the scholarship of both I. Haynes and H. Haynes could be seen to illustrate this point succinctly. It would be a shame if practitioners of historiography were to overlook this valuable and far-reaching monograph through M.’s sustained efforts to avoid being associated too closely with the kind of Roman historiographers guyed by J.E. Lendon in his spirited article ‘Historians without History: against Roman Historiography’ from the 2009 Cambridge Companion to the Roman Historians edited by A. Feldherr (M.’s former advisor for his 2007 dissertation). In short, M. has produced a tremendously enjoyable book, which has much to say to historians of Rome and Roman historiographers alike.
Apuleius tells us of his own popularity as a writer, and yet both the literary and the material r... more Apuleius tells us of his own popularity as a writer, and yet both the literary and the material records are silent about his works for almost one hundred and fifty years after his death. Various attempts to identify allusions to his works before Lactantius and other fourth-century authors have proven unconvincing. This article suggests that there is a clear allusion to the Metamorphoses in Tertullian's treatise Aduersus Valentinianos (beginning of the third century). Tertullian uses Apuleius to denigrate the Valentinians and to assimilate the name of one of their gods to the braying of an ass.
In the prologue to the Rhetorica ad Herennium book 4, Cornificius boldly departs from tradition: ... more In the prologue to the Rhetorica ad Herennium book 4, Cornificius boldly departs from tradition: he will create his own examples to illustrate styles and figures of rhetoric, rather than drawing from poets and orators, as Greek manuals typically did. This methodological discussion, which resembles a declamation, portrays itself as an exemplum in that it embodies the precepts exposed in books 1, 2, and 3. Moreover, this exemplary discussion partakes in a larger debate between philosophy and rhetoric and must be considered in its historical and cultural context.
The first book of Cicero's epistles to his friends displays a cunning arrangement, and there is m... more The first book of Cicero's epistles to his friends displays a cunning arrangement, and there is much to gain in reading its eleven letters as a collection. I this article I argue that the conventional affirmation of the bond that joins writer and addressee grows into a story of loyalty and obligation, and that the arrangement designed by the editor enhances this story to Cicero's advantage. I also propose a new reading of letter 10 (the last in the collection) arguing that it has been often dismissed and misunderstood.
How long was a colon? How does one divide prose in cola and determine the length their syllables?... more How long was a colon? How does one divide prose in cola and determine the length their syllables? And which clausulae did Cicero favor? This abstract (from the section on style of my commentary on Cicero's De Provinciis Consularibus) is meant to address these questions and provide a step by step guide to the rules of scanning prose; mastering these rules should allow anyone to identify and appreciate Latin prose rhythm and clausulae.
In analyzing the double sermocinatio of Cicero's Pro Plancio, I argue that each plays a central r... more In analyzing the double sermocinatio of Cicero's Pro Plancio, I argue that each plays a central role in the oration and that a web of literary references links it to some letters by Cicero and to Plato's Crito. Appreciating these literary references both clarifies and strengthens the line of Cicero’s self-defense.
This article analyzes the strategies by which the narrator of Caesar’s Bellum Civile constructs h... more This article analyzes the strategies by which the narrator of Caesar’s Bellum Civile constructs his authority and promotes his version of the civil war. Despite being generally omnipresent, omniscient and un-intrusive, the narrator can abandon his covert position and all-encompassing knowledge and use multiple devices to guide the readers’ perception of salient events. Switches of focalization, inferred motivation, presentation through negation and intratextual echoes color the narrative of key episodes, such as the negotiations of peace with Pompey in Book 1 and the descriptions of the battles at Dyrrachium and Pharsalus.
Well-known as a brilliant general and politician, Julius Caesar also played a fundamental role in... more Well-known as a brilliant general and politician, Julius Caesar also played a fundamental role in the formation of the Latin literary language and remains a central figure in the history of Latin literature. With twenty-three chapters written by renowned scholars, this Companion provides an accessible introduction to Caesar as an intellectual along with a scholarly assessment of his multiple literary accomplishments and new insights into their literary value. The Commentarii and Caesar’s lost works are presented in their historical and literary context. The various chapters explore their main features, the connection between literature, state religion and politics, Caesar’s debt to previous Greek and Latin authors, and his legacy within and outside of Latin literature. The innovative volume will be of great value to all students and scholars of Latin literature and to those seeking a more rounded portrait of the achievements of Julius Caesar.
Abstract: Intertextual references help Caesar to narrate the defeat at Atuatuca. Scholars have ac... more Abstract: Intertextual references help Caesar to narrate the defeat at Atuatuca. Scholars have acknowledged the intratextual relation to another episode in the BG, but Caesar’s account is embedded in a more complex field of textual references. The locus of two generals dangerously disagreeing is found in Greek literature and historiography; and, especially, Caesar’s vocabulary connects Atuatuca to a famous episode by Polybius. These references help to situate Caesar in Greek and Roman literary tradition and demonstrate that the dynamics of imitation, competition and appropriation typical of poetry from the Augustan age were well established in prose authors of the late Republic.
Abstract: Recent scholarship consistently considered Caesar's Bellum Civile (BC) an unfinishe... more Abstract: Recent scholarship consistently considered Caesar's Bellum Civile (BC) an unfinished work or propaganda, unworthy of being called “literature.” This dissertation,“Ideology and Community in Caesar's Bellum Civile,” reassesses its literary ...
sometimes distracting (e.g. p. 158), at least for this reader. My final point relates to how M. s... more sometimes distracting (e.g. p. 158), at least for this reader. My final point relates to how M. situates his excellent monograph within the sphere of Roman historiography. At times M. demarcates strongly (polemically, even) between (on the one hand) ‘literary’ (pp. 7, 69) or ‘intertextual’ readings (p. 1) (which he robustly criticises, despite himself using the same techniques productively e.g. on pp. 40–1, 80–1) and (on the other hand) ‘historiographical’ ones (to which he himself lays claim [p. 208]). Yet the former techniques are surely subsets of the latter, given that historiography focuses on the writing of history. I suggest that when M. makes such distinctions, ‘historiographical’ and ‘historical’ might have been clearer terms to use. Although M. defines his own scholarship as delivering a new kind of historiography, aspects of his monograph still have a tangible relationship with the trailblazers of historiography (T.P. Wiseman and A.J. Woodman) despite his unease about such associations. Interestingly, M.’s cover image of the Batavian cavalryman Imerix’s fragmentary gravestone and even the monograph’s title seem to make a statement, pointedly aligning M.’s scholarship with serious history and distancing him from ‘literary’ readings of Tacitus’ Histories. Nonetheless the body of the work is packed with perceptive historiographical (as I see it) analysis of Tacitus’ Histories (and well beyond). M.’s achievement is to deliver historiographical readings which are rooted (more firmly than some) in historical soil: indeed his even-handed and detailed references in footnotes to the scholarship of both I. Haynes and H. Haynes could be seen to illustrate this point succinctly. It would be a shame if practitioners of historiography were to overlook this valuable and far-reaching monograph through M.’s sustained efforts to avoid being associated too closely with the kind of Roman historiographers guyed by J.E. Lendon in his spirited article ‘Historians without History: against Roman Historiography’ from the 2009 Cambridge Companion to the Roman Historians edited by A. Feldherr (M.’s former advisor for his 2007 dissertation). In short, M. has produced a tremendously enjoyable book, which has much to say to historians of Rome and Roman historiographers alike.
Uploads